OKAY, WHAT'S UP
WITH COMPOSTABLE PLASTICS?
KEY INFORMATION TO KNOW BEFORE CHOOSING YOUR PRODUCTS
JANUARY 2019
ABSTRACT
Despite standardization processes that have been working since 1992 to give industries and consumers clear information, there is still a lot of confusion about what compostable plastics are made of and whether they can actually be composted. Single-use waste items are a major concern for waste management and environmental protection, and various options for reducing these items and making them less harmful to humans and ecosystems are just beginning. When working with food services, if single-use items cannot be avoided, the goals are to provide products that are useful to customers, consistent with waste
management systems, and as environmentally friendly as possible. In addition, businesses find it useful when all waste disposal can be streamlined and simplified to decrease
management and disposal costs. Because food contamination makes recycling challenging, and organics are banned from most landfills, composting all food service waste is desirable to achieve these goals.
However, many food service items cannot be served in fully compostable wood and paper fibre products: compostable plastics are designed to fulfill this need. This document clears up general points of confusion about compostable plastic, certification standards, and composting processes. In addition, it gives an overview of composting-related progress in the Metro Vancouver area, summarizes local facilities and what items they accept, and provides potential directions for future development to reduce single-use items and divert more organic waste from landfill.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CERTIFIED COMPOSTABLE PLASTICS
INDUSTRIAL COMPOSTING
COMPOSTING FACILITY CHALLENGES
CURRENT PROGRESS IN METRO VANCOUVER ABSTRACT
WHAT CAN YOUR BUSINESS DO?
CONCLUSION: THREE PROBLEMS AND THEIR SOLUTIONS REFERENCES
CERTIFICATION STANDARDS
COMMON COMPOSTABLE CHEMICALS GREEN LABELLED PRODUCTS
ARE COMPOSTABLE PLASTICS RECYCLABLE?
LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1
3
3 3 4 5 5
6
GENERAL PROCESS FOUR MAIN METHODS
FACILITY-BASED RESEARCH TABLE 1
ONGOING RESEARCH
6 6 6 7
8
9
FACILITIES, LICENSING & CONTRACTS
RESIDENTIAL VERSUS COMMERCIAL STREAM CONFUSION HEARING FROM COMPOSTING FACILITIES
HEARING FROM WASTE TRANSFER STATIONS AND BROKERS FOCUS: SEA TO SKY SOILS
FOCUS: HOP COMPOST LTD.
9 9 9 10 10
11
CANADA'S OCEAN PLASTICS CHARTER
METRO VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT-ZERO WASTE CHALLENGE CITY OF VANCOUVER-SINGLE USE ITEM REDUCTION STRATEGY
PAPER, COMPOSTABLE PLASTIC, OR PETROLEUM PRODUCTS?
STREAMLINE YOUR WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM STAY UP TO DATE TABLE 2
11
11 11
12
13
13 14
14
15
16
17
CERTIFIED
COMPOSTABLE PLASTIC
According to international certification bodies such as the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and third-party certifiers like the Biodegradable Products Institute (BPI), a truly “biodegradable” plastic must also be fully “compostable”. This specification means that the product breaks down completely into organic molecules and does not contain any petroleum chemicals (Bastioli, 2014b; Vieira, 2011). Throughout this paper, the terms “biodegradable” and
“compostable” will both refer to items that conform to these standards. To be certified by international organizations like ISO, ASTM, and BPI, biodegradable plastics generally must:
1. Be composed of organic chemicals, which can be natural or synthetic.
2. Disintegrate by 90% into particle sizes smaller than 2mm within 12 weeks, and compost
completely (disappear) within 6 months in an industrial composting facility.
3. Not inhibit the industrial composting process.
4. Not have ecotoxic effects on the soil produced (Bastioli, 2014a).
Importantly, these standards reflect conditions in industrial composting facilities. Certified
compostable plastics do not necessarily degrade in backyard composting methods, because this compost typically does not reach the necessary heat level for long enough. Compostable plastics also do not break down by the above standards in a landfill, litter, or ocean setting. To degrade properly within the time specifications,
compostable plastics must be processed for a minimum of 2 months in an industrial composting facility that optimizes heat for microorganisms that break down organic matter.
CERTIFICATION STANDARDS
COMMON COMPOSTABLE CHEMICALS
A common biodegradable polymer used to create compostable plastic is Poly Lactic Acid (PLA). PLA is created synthetically by using bacteria to ferment agricultural waste (Rojan, Anisha, Nair, & Nampoothiri, 2011). This
fermentation leads to the creation of lactic acid (the same chemical our muscles produce when we work them too hard), which is then heated and pressurized to create PLA (Rojan et al., 2011).
PLA is often combined with polyglycolic acid (PGA), another biodegradable chemical, to fine- tune certain properties such as hardness, water resistance, and heat resistance (Vieira, 2011).
These chemicals are used to create single-use products such as cold beverage containers and can also line paper-based products such as coffee cups (Bastioli, 2014c). In addition, PLA can be processed at high pressure and heat to become a product known as crystallized-PLA (CPLA). Used to make utensils and lids, CPLA includes PLA, chalk, and other certified biodegradable plastics that make the product harder and less susceptible to heat degradation during use (Bio Futura, 2018). Similarly, talc- injected PLA (TPLA) is composed of PLA and talc, a natural mineral which allows PLA to be molded into harder materials like utensils (Aversa,
Barletta, Pizzi, Puopolo, & Vesco, 2017; Shakoor &
Thomas, 2014). There are no petroleum products or chemicals in PLA or PGA, which means they are truly biodegradable (Vieira, 2011). Other polymers that are starch-based or composed partially from organic materials are sometimes advertised as biodegradable or bio-based.
However, these products are not compostable, and often are not even feasibly recyclable. Only products with a certification logo from a
recognized standardization facility have undergone rigorous testing to ensure they biodegrade fully in an industrial composting setting.
GREEN LABELED PRODUCTS
Though certified biodegradable and compostable products conform to high standards, there is a wide market of “Green- Labeled” products that confuse consumers and industries. Products that claim to be
biodegradable may actually be composed of petroleum-based chemicals that disintegrate into microplastics rather than organic chemicals in a process called oxo-degradation (Adamcová, Radziemska, Fronczyk, Zloch, & Vaverková, 2017;
Bastioli, 2014d). These products will sometimes contain Totally Degradable Plastic Additive (TDPA), which is an organic additive that assists in degradation of plastics (whether biodegradable or not) (Adamcová, Vaverková, &
Toman, 2013). However, the microplastics resulting from degradation of non-organic plastics are harmful to ecosystems, and their use should be avoided (Adamcová & Vaverková, 2014). In fact, reduction of microplastics entering ecosystems such as the ocean is a key concern for many conservationists and has recently been prioritized in the Canadian Government’s Ocean Plastics Charter (Canada, 2018). The best way to avoid consequences of using Green-Labelled products is to only purchase biodegradable plastic products that have been certified by ISO, ASTM, BPI, Vincotte OK Compost, or other international standardization bodies (see Figure 1).
Figure 1: Compost certification labels and misleading Green-Labeled counterparts. Image from Association of Whistler Area Residents for the Environment (AWARE Whistler, 2016).
In short, no. There are three key reasons why compostable plastics should not or cannot be disposed into existing recycling programs.
1. Recycling facilities are not equipped to handle them.
At some point, all properly recycled materials are processed in a Material Recovery Facility (MRF).
These facilities use a series of machines which recognize and sift out certain types of waste to be baled and eventually recycled (LeBlanc, n.d.;
Recycle More NC, 2011; Rumpke Waste &
Recycling, 2010). Identifying and sorting different types of plastics often requires laser and air technology to properly sort plastics. Many current MRF processes do not identify compostable plastics, which means that they must be picked out by hand and disposed of, usually in a landfill or incinerator.
2. They are often contaminated with food waste.
Food waste is problematic for recycling any product. However, since compostable plastic is marketed toward use in food service industries, food contamination may be higher. This
contamination makes recycling these materials less profitable, because they must also be cleaned before they can be processed.
3. They cannot currently be collected in sufficient quantity.
These products are still relatively new, so no mechanized or universalized recycling process exists for them between consumers and recycling facilities. Thus, compostable plastics are not currently collected at rates that make it profitable to invest in expanded collection or recycling technology.
If these three limitations were accounted for, it would largely be possible to recycle
compostable plastics. However, the difficulties associated with compostable plastics are, in fact,
common to all plastic waste items (Welle, 2011).
Compostable plastics are intended to overcome these challenges by nature of being industrially compostable, allowing processers to skip the many stages required for recycling.
ARE COMPOSTABLE PLASTICS RECYCLABLE?
LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Regarding compostable plastics, sustainability researchers are also interested in the overall environmental impact of these products compared to other options. A life cycle analysis (LCA) is a common method for assessing a product’s environmental impact because it includes a “cradle-based” analysis that considers production, use, and disposal phases. A recent literature review published by the State of Oregon Department of Environmental Quality found that compostable plastics have mixed environmental impacts when compared to traditional petroleum products (Vendries et al., 2018, p. 77). The authors reviewed 10 studies that use LCA models to compare compostable and plastic packaging in general, and 7 studies that compare compostable and non-compostable foodware. Distinctions between compostable and traditional plastics arose from different
environmental crediting for disposal methods, and diverse modelling assumptions. Importantly, the review notes that compostable plastics generate high emissions through the synthesis of PLA (which uses agricultural wastes) and
harvesting of trees for paper fibre products (such as coffee cups) (Vendries et al., 2018, p. 90, 2018, p. 92). Interestingly, the study which compared compostable and non-compostable utensils showed a significantly lower environmental impact from compostable cutlery (Vendries et al., 2018, p. 92). The authors express the need for more studies and consistent modeling practices to improve knowledge about compostable plastic production, use, and disposal (Vendries et al., 2018, p. 77). However, their initial conclusion is that compostable plastics, and compostable plastics combined with paper fibre, have mixed environmental impacts and should not be celebrated as a silver bullet sustainable solution.
INDUSTRIAL COMPOSTING
Composting facilities typically take 2-6 months to fully compost their organic matter. Upon intake of compost material, the first stage is generally to sift through the organic input on a conveyor belt, using human or mechanic power to remove any large contaminants. Next, facilities send material through a grinder that partially disintegrates material to speed up the
composting process. The input material is then mixed with a feedstock, which is composed of already-composted organic material full of microorganisms, to ensure an appropriate nitrogen to carbon ratio, moisture, and oxygen content. This mixture then goes through a high heat and intense composting phase generally lasting 3-6 weeks to sanitize and break down most of the organic material. This composting stage is where most facilities vary in their process (see Table 1). Finally, all compost must undergo a curing process that reduces heat and finalizes material breakdown. Curing usually lasts 2-4 months depending on the composting process.
final process uses microorganisms suited for an anaerobic (non-oxygenated) environment. These processes are:
GENERAL PROCESS
FACILITY-BASED RESEARCH
A recent study at BC composting facilities (Zhang et al., 2017) found that all PLA products
decomposed significantly better than paper fibre-based products in three out of four types of composting practices. Another study in Vermont at a static pile composting facility tested
different certified compostable and Green- Labeled biodegradable cutlery and found that all ASTM and/or BPI certified compostable plastics degraded successfully in their facility, whereas all Green-Labeled products did not (Clark, 2014).
These and other findings reinforce the
importance of using standardized materials and increasing communication about which products industries and consumers should use.
According to this study, all composting methods except anaerobic digestion are capable of fully composting PLA. In-vessel composting most successfully composts all types of foodware products. Since these BC facilities combine methods to maximise output quality, PLA products are successfully compostable in all tested facilities, which conforms to the standards required by compostable certification standards.
However, this result does not mean that all facilities accept compostable plastics. As such, the waste diversion and decontamination potential of compostable plastics has yet to be fully realized.
FOUR MAIN METHODS
There are four main types of industrial composting processes that are often combined by facilities to refine and improve their products (Table 1). All processes involve high temperatures because organisms that degrade organic material tend to thrive in high heat (about 60 degrees Celsius) (Bastioli, 2014a). Additional factors such as moisture and oxygen are also controlled to improve
microorganism functions. Three of the processes are aerobic, which means they cultivate microorganisms that thrive in an oxygen-rich environment, and the
Static Pile / Aerated Static Pile Turned Windrow
In-vessel
Anaerobic Digestion
T A B L E 1
D A T A S U M M A R I Z E D F R O M Z H A N G E T A L . ( 2 0 1 7 )
M E T H O D S O F I N D U S T R I A L C O M P O S T I N G A N D F O O D W A R E P R O D U C T S C O M P O S T A B I L I T Y R E S U L T S
T Y P E
M E T H O D A N D F A C I L I T Y
P R O C E S S
T E S T I N G P E R I O D A N D
T O T A L P R O C E S S I N G
T I M E
P R O D U C T S C O M P O S T E D > 8 0 %
( 5 T Y P E S O F P R O D U C T S
T O T A L )
1
Static Pile
Harvest Power (Richmond, BC)
Organic waste is mixed, piled and aerated from underneath to add oxygen for aerobic bacteria. Pile is
watered regularly.
Test:
2 months Processing:
2-4 months (including turning and curing)
1. PLA 2. Fibre (tree) 3. Fibre (bagasse)
2
Turned Windrow Revolution Resource
Recovery (Lytton, BC)
Organic waste is ground and piled into rows, which
are turned mechanically about every 2 weeks to maintain heat and oxygen
levels.
Test:
4 months Processing:
8-10 months composting, 8-12 months curing
*Low compostability of fibre products may be
due to low moisture.
1. PLA
3
In-vessel (followed by roofed
windrow) Whistler Composting
Facility (Whistler/Squamish,
BC)
Organic waste is mixed and piled indoors in temperature, oxygen, and
moisture-controlled tunnels, with trays that turn the waste. Then, material is
sifted and cured in covered windrow.
Test:
5 months (about 3 weeks in-vessel, 4 months curing)
Processing:
6-8 months
1. PLA 2. Fibre (tree) 3. Fibre (bagasse) 4. Fibre (cellulose) 5. Fibre lined with PLA
4
Anaerobic Digestion (followed by Static Pile)
Harvest Power (Richmond, BC)
Organic waste is processed in water to maintain low-
oxygen conditions, supporting anaerobic bacteria. After 2 weeks, material is moved to a static pile that is turned monthly to
maintain oxygen levels.
Test:
2 months Processing:
3 months (including curing in static pile)
1. Fibre (cellulose)
Though the products are not new, facilities and regulatory bodies are in the process of learning more about them. Understanding compostable plastic and how they are processed at various composting facilities is an increasing priority for Metro Vancouver and municipalities such as the City of Vancouver, which has included a special focus on compostable plastics in their Single-use Item Reduction Strategy (Vancouver, 2018c).
Results are upcoming from their research.
A project currently underway is the International Field Testing Program, that focuses on certified compostable plastics’ degradation success (McGill & Oshins, 2018). The program was produced by the Compost Council Research &
Education Foundation (CCREF), a nonprofit which strives to clarify composting standards (CCREF, 2018), and BSIbio Packaging Solutions/BÉSICS®
(BSIbio), a Vancouver company that produces compostable plastics (BSIbio, 2018). Through the project, composting facilities are provided materials such as plastic mesh bags and a sample of certified compostable products which they may send through their composting process to evaluate compostability of materials (the same methodology used by Zhang et al., 2017). In this way, facilities are empowered to evaluate whether certified compostable plastics degrade in their system and may upload this information on an open-source database (McGill & Oshins, 2018).
As this project is currently underway, no results are currently available. However, the research is promising because it will allow facilities to determine which products their process successfully composts, with the potential for opportunities to upgrade or expand their systems to include compostable plastics in certain
streams.
ONGOING RESEARCH
COMPOSTING FACILITY
CHALLENGES
Composting facilities ultimately determine whether compostable plastics will be accepted or not (Metro Vancouver, n.d.). Acceptance is based both on their facility process and licensed waste item allowances (Table 2). Private waste haulers typically contract with composting facilities, while some composting facilities also directly contract with businesses. The line of communication between businesses, haulers, and composting facilities includes item acceptability and maximum contamination allowances. Acceptable items and contamination levels are also affected by regional and
provincial policies. BC’s Organics Matter
Recycling Regulation (OMRR) (Province of British Columbia, 2002) (including amendments up to July 27, 2018) specifies facility management regulations as well as which items are accepted (see Schedule 12: Organic Matter Suitable for Composting). Since compostable plastics are not currently included in BC’s OMRR, there are no regulated best-practices for accepting compostable plastics from a provincial standpoint. This limitation makes it difficult for regions, municipalities, and composting facilities to regulate acceptance and processing of compostable plastics.
Vancouver-area compost facilities do not accept compostable plastics in their residential waste stream (da Silva, 2018), and few accept
compostable plastics in their Institutional, Commercial, Industrial (ICI) waste stream.
FACILITIES, LICENSING &
CONTRACTS
The reason for this distinction is that the widespread confusion about certified
compostable plastics versus Green-Labelled products leads to high contamination of the compost stream, which the composting facilities do not have the resources to manage (Vendries et al., 2018). This difference between residential and ICI composting streams limits options for people to use compostable plastics in their homes, which confuses people about whether products are “actually compostable” or not. In addition, media sources continue to put out sensational reports and videos with highlights that mislead the public about compostable plastics (for examples, see BuzzFeedVideo, 2018;
da Silva, 2018), which are not currently effectively countered by official industry and government communications to clarify the issue. When consumers encounter different regulations at their businesses and in their homes, they become confused and more likely to make contaminating disposal choices.
RESIDENTIAL VERSUS COMMERCIAL STREAM CONFUSION
HEARING FROM COMPOSTING FACILITIES
For this report, representatives from four Metro Vancouver and Sea to Sky area composting facilities were asked about challenges with compostable plastics. Though many could not share details of their composting process, all representatives stated that the key contaminant their staff and machinery pulled out is plastic.
Some expressed that their facility did not achieve high enough heat to process compostable plastic, and others did not believe that compostable plastic was truly compostable.
Additional challenges involved mechanics of their sifting and mixing technology. For example, one representative stated that certified
compostable plastic bags composted well in their facility, but if the bags were not ground and mixed in properly, then any organics inside the bag would not compost properly and would have to undergo another round of composting, which
is less desirable due to increased cost for lower return value. Overall, representatives expressed that contamination from plastics is their largest challenge, and confusion about compostable plastics leads to higher contamination and thus lower-quality composted material. This outcome means that that safest option is to restrict compostable plastics completely from all streams, or to only accept certified compostable plastics through a clear contract agreement and visual verification of products with businesses that wish to use compostable plastics.
Before organic waste is processed at composting facilities, it is often collected and repackaged at a Transfer Station or Brokering Facility (see Table 2). As such, if a Transfer Station or Brokering Facility wishes to send higher-quality products to compost facilities at a greater value, they are less likely to accept compostable plastics in their organics stream due to the risk of higher
contamination. Private waste haulers face similar challenges because it is only feasible to collect products which can be sold for a high enough value. Some facilities, such as Revolution Infrastructure Inc. (Table 2), require a specific contract from businesses that ensures all their compostable plastic waste is certified. Revolution Infrastructure Inc. also requires compostable plastic products to be visually verified by their staff before the product can be included in the contract. For large-scale operations like Revolution Infrastructure Inc., these
specifications also determine where the facility can send the compostable waste, as only some composting facilities they operate or contract with will accept compostable plastics. Thus, it is important for businesses to communicate clearly with contracted haulers, transfer stations, and
HEARING FROM WASTE TRANSFER STATIONS &
BROKERS
FOCUS: SEA TO SKY SOILS
Sea to Sky Soils (SSS) was very open in discussing their composting process and key challenges, and welcome visitors to tour their facility and understand how their systems work.
This facility processes compost from North Vancouver, as well as Squamish and Pemberton, using a combination of turned windrow and static pile composting (see Table 2). Jaye-Jay
Berggren, the owner-operator of SSS, shared that a key challenge with compostable plastics is that their initial screening process requires
employees to remove large contaminants before sending the input material through a grinder.
Since employees must sift through large
volumes of material, they cannot be expected to be experts on all certifications, and moreover able to identify whether a product is certified compostable when covered with other waste. In addition, picking up many small bits of plastic is more time-consuming than removing a single bag before it enters the grinder. These limitations lead to a lot of compostable plastic being
removed and sent to landfill before it has a chance to undergo composting. Berggren expressed that the easiest products for compost facilities to process are wood- and paper-based, especially because these materials can be broken down for sale to certified organic farms.
Currently, SSS sells compost from the residential stream (which does not accept compostable plastics) to organic farms in the area, whereas the ICI sector compost is used for other purposes such as landscaping (Berggren, 2018). Other composting facilities face similar challenges with staffing, product identification, screening, and product sale value, which all affect their willingness and ability to process compostable plastics.
FOCUS: HOP COMPOST LTD.
Hop Compost Ltd. accepts compostable plastics (see Table 2), typically from the food services sector. The company operates an in-vessel composting method, so they have direct control over the organic waste mixtures entering the process to ensure compostable material breaks down effectively. The representative expressed that it is important to not overload the facility with compostable plastics because without the right conditions, they do not degrade effectively.
Hop Compost Ltd. also directly collects all the waste it processes, without using any third-party haulers, to ensure the organics it collects are of good-enough quality for their process.
CURRENT
PROGRESS IN METRO
VANCOUVER
CANADA’S OCEAN PLASTICS CHARTER
Throughout 2018, Environment and Climate Change Canada openly addressed the issue of single-use plastics and have developed an action plan to reduce negative impacts. Under a focus on reducing plastics that enter the oceans, some single-use plastics reduction targets they commit to are:
Moving toward 100% reusable, recyclable, or recoverable plastics by 2030.
Recycle and reuse 55% of plastic packaging by 2030 and recover 100% of plastics by 2040.
Use market-based approaches and improve labelling standards to encourage consumers to make sustainable decisions on using plastics.
Encourage intergovernmental collaboration through the G7.
Raise awareness and clean up shorelines and the oceans. (Canada, 2018)
Though it is promising that these conversations and initiatives are being developed at an international level, it must be noted that the current federal agreement is non-binding (Pawson, 2018), however, some key international corporations such as Coca Cola and Nestle have signed on (Kurdi, 2018). Thus, to improve plastics diversion and reduce single-use items, more actionable strategies occur at regional and local government levels, such as Metro Vancouver.
METRO VANCOUVER
REGIONAL DISTRICT – ZERO WASTE CHALLENGE
Since 2015, organics have been banned from entering landfills in Metro Vancouver. This was the first strategic stage of Metro Vancouver’s Zero Waste Challenge Strategy (Metro Vancouver, 2011).
Following stages address single- and multi- family residential units, construction and
demolition waste, and businesses and institutions (Metro Vancouver, 2011). Pertaining to waste management, the regional district’s major initiatives include developing communication material and outreach across all sectors, and improving collaboration and collection services to further reduce the amount of organic and recyclable material entering landfill (Metro Vancouver, 2018a, 2018c). An important resource they provide for all businesses is a complete system of waste management signs that can be edited and adapted to specific business needs (Metro Vancouver, 2018b). One document they provide to clarify history and progress of compostable plastics acceptance is titled
Acceptance of Compostable Plastics in the Metro Vancouver Region (Metro Vancouver, n.d.). The document strongly recommends checking which items the local composting facility accepts to determine whether compostable plastics should be used. Metro Vancouver is also currently developing a Single-use Item Reduction Strategy, alongside the region’s municipalities.
CITY OF VANCOUVER –
SINGLE-USE ITEM REDUCTION STRATEGY
Under its Greenest City initiative, the City of Vancouver has committed to significantly reducing single-use items (paper and plastic) by 2025 (Vancouver, 2018c), following its Zero Waste 2040 plan (Vancouver, 2018a). Vancouver’s priorities include reducing greenhouse gas emissions from landfills, recovering useful resources from waste, and creating social and economic opportunities through zero-waste initiatives and a circular economy (Vancouver, 2018b). Vancouver’s Single-use Item Reduction Strategy addresses use of:
Plastic and paper shopping bags Polystyrene foam cups and take-out containers
Disposable hot and cold drink cups Take-out food containers
Disposable straws and utensils
experienced by stakeholders, and to complete technical research on compostable packaging.
Results of this investigation are expected in 2019.
Importantly, a goal of the investigation was to identify compostable foodware (including compostable plastic and paper fibre products) that are not only internationally certified, but which are also approved by local composting facilities (Vancouver, 2018c). Vancouver also discusses regulating which compostable plastics may enter the market, to eventually remove Green-Labelled but non-compostable items from circulation and decrease public confusion
leading to contamination. For most single-use items Vancouver consulted about, businesses supported strategies that allowed them to adapt their own systems to using alternative material, rather than the region imposing a complete ban outright. However, the Single-use Item Reduction Strategy also states that if reduction targets have not been met by 2025, then Vancouver will impose full bans on certain items to ensure compliance (Vancouver, 2018c). Thus, businesses can expect regulation of certified compostable plastics and approval in local composting
facilities by 2025, and progress toward regulation starting in 2019.
In the fall of 2018, Vancouver was scheduled to review bylaw details inhibiting proper organics disposal, recycling, or other challenges
WHAT CAN YOUR BUSINESS DO?
So, what’s up with compostable plastics? Should they be used, or avoided at all costs? This report has aimed to clear up general confusion about compostable plastic, certification standards, and composting processes. In addition, it gives a brief overview of where the Vancouver region now stands regarding compostable plastic items, and potential directions for future development to reduce single-use items and divert more organic waste from landfill. This section describes actionable strategies that businesses can undertake to provide more sustainable products and waste management systems.
PAPER, COMPOSTABLE PLASTIC, OR PETROLEUM PRODUCTS?
When making sustainable product decisions, businesses should continuously re-evaluate their needs as well as progress in technology and regulations regarding their products. First, reduction of waste items overall is the top
priority. Where this is not possible, composting facilities generally agree that wood, paper, and bamboo products are much easier for their systems to process. However, wood and paper products are difficult to implement widely across all food service industry needs because they are not suitable for all food types. Comparing environmental impacts of wood and paper products, compostable plastics, and petroleum plastics will be important as more businesses and regions begin to consider the overall environmental impacts of their products. For example, the literature review that compiles life- cycle analyses of foodware products (Vendries et al., 2018) finds that compostable plastics have mixed environmental impacts, though many impacts must be further investigated to address current knowledge gaps (see “Life Cycle
Analysis, Environmental Impacts” for discussion).
As more research is completed and information becomes available to facilities and policy- makers, businesses should continually re- evaluate their systems to ensure sustainability goals are met.
Figure 2: Compostable plastic use guideline developed by the author for this report. Generally, businesses should first continually reduce waste production, then pursue reasonable compostable and recyclable alternatives according to
STREAMLINE YOUR WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Clearly, reducing waste items is the top priority.
But if becoming 100% reusable within a year is too idealistic, using compostable plastic and fibre foodware is a reasonable decision. The key value compostable plastics bring to food service businesses is that they prevent food
contamination from entering the recycling and landfill streams, both of which are banned and can result in fines and higher tipping fees. In addition, waste in landfill uses up valuable municipal space and contributes negatively to climate change through emissions and land use.
Streamlined waste is important especially if the waste management system relies on customer disposal, because customer confusion from too many waste item and disposal stream options leads to contamination. Items like cutlery and straws should all be collected in the same stream, likewise with clamshells and to-go cups.
Ideally, all foodware distributed should be compostable to both limit the customer’s potential for making a contaminating disposal choice, and decrease the number of bins and amount of sorting that staff must do when cleaning up the waste. If regions can process compostable plastics locally at composting facilities, negative environmental impacts from transporting recyclable waste overseas will also be avoided.
STAY UP TO DATE
Where possible, businesses should contract with composting facilities that accept compostable plastics as well as fibre-based products. If it is not possible to engage a composting company that accepts compostable plastics, prioritize use of wood, paper, and other natural fibre products to ensure they are properly composted, and
Stay up to date if your waste management company or region begins to accept compostable plastics and expect improved clarity and communication about these products from Metro Vancouver’s municipalities. For waste management systems to work effectively, it is important that information is consistent across sectors, and well-communicated. Standardization of compostable plastics use in B.C. will be a positive step for guiding businesses and reducing single-use item waste. Solid waste personnel at the municipal level and with Metro Vancouver can provide information about current and potential future regulations and practices regarding compostable plastics, and are thus a valuable resource to guide future decisions about waste items.
CONCLUSION:
THREE PROBLEMS AND THEIR SOLUTIONS
Certified compostable plastics compost completely in industrial composting facilities.
However, three challenges to their use are:
General confusion about the products, leading to
contamination of compost, recycling, and landfill waste streams.
Most collection and processing systems are not currently able to handle these items
efficiently, leading to
compostable plastics being screened out and landfilled or incinerated.
Regulations are not in place to prevent Green-Labelled
products from entering the market, nor to guide waste collection and composting facilities on compostable plastic processing.
To address these challenges, businesses should:
Additional solutions will be found through government regulation of compostable plastics sale and processing, field testing at composting facilities that enables them to determine which items they can accommodate, and improved models that clarify environmental impacts of compostable plastics throughout their product life cycle. In the meantime, compostable plastics are a safe, useful alternative to non-compostable single-use
foodware when they are accepted and properly composted in local composting facilities.
Clarify whether their composting facility accepts compostable plastics, and ensure they only purchase certified compostable plastics that can be composted by the facility.
Provide clear instructions, resources, and streamlined products to employees and customers to ensure all waste streams are contaminated as little as possible.
Stay up to date on municipal and regional waste management regulations relating to
compostable plastics, as many updates are expected from 2019- 2025.
1 2 3
1
2
3
T A B L E 2
P R E F I X E S I N D I C A T E : B - B R O K E R I N G F A C I L I T I E S ; C - C O M P O S T I N G F A C I L I T I E S ; T - T R A N S F E R
S T A T I O N S / M A T E R I A L R E C O V E R Y F A C I L I T I E S ( M E T R O V A N C O U V E R , 2 0 1 8 E ) . O B T A I N E D T H R O U G H M E T R O V A N C O U V E R ’ S P U B L I C L Y A V A I L A B L E D A T A B A S E O F S O L I D W A S T E F A C I L I T Y L I C E N S E S .
F A C I L I T Y I N F O R M A T I O N R E G A R D I N G A C C E P T E D I T E M S ,
C O M P O S T A B L E P L A S T I C S A C C E P T A N C E , A N D C O M P O S T I N G P R O C E S S .
F A C I L I T Y I N F O R M A T I O N
C O M P O S T A B L E P L A S T I C S A C C E P T E D ?
C O M P O S T I N G P R O C E S S
Hop Compost Ltd.
1328 Marine Drive, Vancouver 403-860-1471
Food Waste,
Wood Chips Yes
In-vessel, followed by Covered Static Pile 8-12 days In-vessel, 5 weeks Static Pile
L I C E N S E S O U R C E
(Metro Vancouver, 2016l) L I C E N S E
( M E T R O V A N C O U V E R )
A C C E P T E D I T E M S
C-022
Revolution Infrastructure Inc.
19500 - 56th Avenue, Surrey, BC;
460 East Kent Avenue South, Vancouver, BC 604-539-1900
T-040;
T-041;
T-044
Single Stream Mixed Recyclables, Paper
Products, Source Separated Organic Waste, Clean Wood
Waste
Yes Conditional: product
must be visibly confirmed and included in contract.
NA (Transfer Facility)
(Uncertain)
(Metro Vancouver,
2016a, 2016b, 2016c)
B-047 Recycling
Alternative 449 Industrial Avenue, Vancouver, BC
604-874-7283
Single Stream Mixed Recyclables, Paper
Products, Source Separated Organic Waste, Clean Wood
Waste
Yes Sends organic
material to Revolution Infrastructure Inc.
NA (Brokering Facility)
(Metro Vancouver,
2016g)
C-021 Anaconda Systems
Ltd.
8601 Main Street, Vancouver, B.C.
604-630-5811
Food Waste, Paper Products,
Yard Waste
No
In-Vessel, followed by Static Pile
8-10 weeks
(Metro Vancouver,
2016e)
Baird Cattle &
Border Feedlot Corp.
17256 - 8th Avenue, Surrey, BC
604-813-7511
Food Waste, Minimum rubber content tire fibre,
Cardboard
Covered Static Pile 5-6 weeks
(Metro Vancouver,
2016i)
C-001 No
Ecowaste Industries Ltd.
15111 Williams Road, Richmond, BC 604-788-0484
Yard Waste
Turned Windrow Timeline not
available
(Metro Vancouver,
2016j)
C-007 No
Enviro-Smart Organics Ltd.
4295 72nd Street, Delta, BC 604-946-0201
Food Waste, Yard Waste, Paper Products,
Clean Wood Waste
No
Covered, Aerated Static Pile, followed by Turned Windrow
4-8 weeks
(Metro Vancouver,
2016f) C-016
Harvest Fraser Richmond Organics Ltd. (Harvest) 7028 York Road, Richmond, BC 604-270-7500
C-004
Food Waste, Yard Waste, Paper Products,
Clean Wood Waste
Aerated Static Windrows 6-10 weeks
*ending service
(Metro Vancouver,
2018d)
B-052 Harvest Fraser
Richmond Organics Ltd. (Harvest) 7029 York Road, Richmond, BC 604-270-7501
Packaged Organic Waste, Packaged
Liquid Waste
No
Anaerobic Digestion
*ending service
(Metro Vancouver,
2017)
B-031 Augustine Soil &
Mulch Ltd.
17949 Kennedy Road, Pitt Meadows, BC
604-465-5193
Food Waste, Yard Waste, Paper Products,
Clean Wood Waste
No NA
(Brokering Facility)
(Metro Vancouver,
2016k)
Meadows Landscape Supply Ltd.
17799 Ferry Slip Road, Pitt Meadows, BC
604-465-1311
Food Waste, Yard Waste, Clean
Wood Waste
NA (Brokering Facility)
(Metro Vancouver,
2016d)
B-032 No
Cascades Recovery Inc.
12345 - 104 Avenue, Surrey, BC
604-589-4385
Recyclable Materials, Source
Separated Organics
NA (Brokering Facility)
(Metro Vancouver,
2016h)
B-010 No
Sea to Sky Soils S Rutherford Creek Rd, Pemberton/Whistler.
9km S of Pemberton off Highway 99 604-907-2876
Source Separated Organics, Yard
Waste, Food Waste
Turned Windrow, followed by Static
pile
(Berggren, 2018)
NA Yes
(Commercial stream)
Whistler Composting Facility
Whistler Waste Transfer Station, Callaghan Valley Road (15km S of Whistler off Highway 99)
Source Separated Organics, Yard
Waste, Food waste, Biosolids
In-vessel (Zhang et al., 2017)
NA Yes
No
O T H E R S ( S E A T O S K Y R E G I O N )
REFERENCES
Adamcová, D., Radziemska, M., Fronczyk, J., Zloch, J., & Vaverková, M. D. (2017). Research of the biodegradability of degradable/biodegradable plastic material in various types of environments. Przegląd Naukowy Inżynieria I Kształtowanie Środowiska, 26(1), 3–14.
Adamcová, D., Vaverková, M., & Toman, F. (2013). Repeated research of biodegradability of plastics materials in real composting conditions. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, 61(6), 1557–1564.
https://doi.org/10.11118/actaun201361061557
Aversa, C., Barletta, M., Pizzi, E., Puopolo, M., & Vesco, S. (2017). Wear resistance of injection moulded PLA-talc engineered bio- composites: Effect of material design, thermal history and shear stresses during melt processing. Wear, 390-391, 184–197.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2017.08.001
AWARE Whistler. (2016). Waste Management and Reduction Solutions for Businesses. Retrieved January 5, 2019, from http://www.awarewhistler.org/businesswastesolutions/
Bastioli, C. (2014a). Ecotoxicological Aspects of the Biodegradation Process of Polymers. In Handbook of Biodegradable Polymers (Vol. Second edition). Shropshire, England: Smithers Rapra. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.questu.ca:2048/login?
url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=e000xna&AN=919258&site=eds-live&scope=site
Bastioli, C. (2014b). International and National Norms on Biodegradability and Certification Procedures. In Handbook of Biodegradable Polymers (Vol. Second edition). Shropshire, England: Smithers Rapra. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.questu.ca:2048/login?
url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=e000xna&AN=919258&site=eds-live&scope=site
Bastioli, C. (2014c). Lactic Acid-based Degradable Polymers. In Handbook of Biodegradable Polymers (Vol. Second edition).
Shropshire, England: Smithers Rapra. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.questu.ca:2048/login?
url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=e000xna&AN=919258&site=eds-live&scope=site
Bastioli, C. (2014d). Methods for Evaluating the Biodegradability of Environmentally Degradable Polymers. In Handbook of Biodegradable Polymers (Vol. Second edition). Shropshire, England: Smithers Rapra. Retrieved from
http://ezproxy.questu.ca:2048/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=e000xna&AN=919258&site=eds- live&scope=site
Berggren, J.-J. (2018, November 9). Personal correspondence [Phone Interview].
Bio Futura. (2018). CPLA | Bio Futura - Sustainable packaging & disposables. Retrieved November 16, 2018, from https://www.biofutura.com/en/materials/cpla
BSIbio. (2018). BSI Biodegradable Solutions ~ About Us. Retrieved January 16, 2019, from https://bsibio.com/about-us/
BuzzFeedVideo. (2018). You’ve Been Using “Compostable” Plastics Wrong. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=BbQH0r0wPus
Canada, E. and C. C. (2018, September 20). Ocean plastics charter [statements]. Retrieved January 7, 2019, from
https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/managing-reducing-waste/international-commitments/ocean- plastics-charter.html
CCREF. (2018). Composting Council Research and Education Foundation > About > The Foundation. Retrieved January 16, 2019, from https://www.compostfoundation.org/About/The-Foundation
Clark, N. (2014). Compostable Cutlety Disintegration Trials. BioCycle, 55(11), 25–29.
da Silva, S. (2018, May 17). Don’t put compostable plastics in green bin, Metro Vancouver says | CBC News. Retrieved January 5, 2019, from https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/compostable-items-confusion-more-infrastructure-needed-1.4665757 Kurdi, L. (2018, September 21). G7 Ocean Plastic Charter : largest corporate polluters among named signatories. Retrieved January 7, 2019, from https://www.greenpeace.org/canada/en/press-release/5101/g7-ocean-plastic-charter-largest-corporate-polluters- among-of-the-named-signatories/
McGill, E., & Oshins, C. (2018). Open Source Field Testing For Certified Compostable Packaging. BioCycle, 59(1), 26.
Metro Vancouver. (2011, February 10). Zero Waste Challenge Strategy. Retrieved from
http://www.metrovancouver.org/boards/WasteManagement/WMA_110215_Regular_Additional_Item_5.2.pdf Metro Vancouver. (2016a, June 3). Licence T040 - Revolution Infrastructure Inc. Retrieved from
http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/Permits-regulations-enforcement/solid-waste/current- licence/CurrentLicences/T040%20-%20Revolution%20Infrastructure%20Incorporated.pdf
Metro Vancouver. (2016b, June 3). Licence T041 - Revolution Infrastructure Inc. Retrieved from http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/Permits-regulations-enforcement/solid-waste/current- licence/CurrentLicences/T041%20-%20Revolution%20Infrastructure%20Incorporated.pdf
Metro Vancouver. (2016c, June 3). Licence T044 - Revolution Infrastructure Inc. Retrieved from http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/Permits-regulations-enforcement/solid-waste/current- licence/CurrentLicences/T044%20-%20Revolution%20Infrastructure%20Incorporated.pdf
Metro Vancouver. (2016d, June 5). Licence B032 - Meadows Landscape Supply Ltd. Retrieved from http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/Permits-regulations-enforcement/solid-waste/current- licence/CurrentLicences/B032%20-%20Meadows%20Landscape%20Supply%20Limited.pdf Metro Vancouver. (2016e, June 7). Licence C021 - Anaconda Systems Limited. Retrieved from http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/Permits-regulations-enforcement/solid-waste/current- licence/CurrentLicences/C021%20-%20Anaconda%20Systems%20Limited.pdf
Metro Vancouver. (2016f, June 8). Licence C016 - Enviro-Smart Organics Ltd. Retrieved from http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/Permits-regulations-enforcement/solid-waste/current- licence/CurrentLicences/C016%20-%20Enviro-Smart%20Organics%20Limited.pdf
Metro Vancouver. (2016g, June 9). Licence B047 - Recycling Alternative. Retrieved from
http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/Permits-regulations-enforcement/solid-waste/current- licence/CurrentLicences/B047%20-%20Recycling%20Alternative.pdf
Metro Vancouver. (2016h, June 10). Licence B010 - Cascades Recovery Inc. Retrieved from
http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/Permits-regulations-enforcement/solid-waste/current- licence/CurrentLicences/B010%20-%20Cascades%20Recovery%20Incorporated.pdf
Metro Vancouver. (2016i, June 15). Licence C001 - Border Feedlot Corporation. Retrieved from http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/Permits-regulations-enforcement/solid-waste/current- licence/CurrentLicences/C001%20-%20Border%20Feedlot%20Corporation.pdf
Metro Vancouver. (2016j, June 29). Licence C007 - Ecowaste Industries Ltd. Retrieved from http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/Permits-regulations-enforcement/solid-waste/current- licence/CurrentLicences/C007%20-%20Ecowaste%20Industries%20Limited.pdf
Metro Vancouver. (2016k, July 6). Licence B031 - Augustine Soil & Mulch Ltd. Retrieved from http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/Permits-regulations-enforcement/solid-waste/current- licence/CurrentLicences/B031%20-%20Augustine%20Soil%20and%20Mulch%20Limited.pdf Metro Vancouver. (2016l, September 22). Licence C022 - Hop Compost Ltd. Retrieved from http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/Permits-regulations-enforcement/solid-waste/current- licence/CurrentLicences/C022%20-%20Hop%20Compost%20Limited.pdf
Metro Vancouver. (2017, February 10). License B052 - Harvest Fraser Richmond Organics Ltd. Retrieved from http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/Permits-regulations-enforcement/solid-waste/current- licence/CurrentLicences/B052%20-%20Harvest.pdf
Metro Vancouver. (2018a). About Food Scraps Recycling. Retrieved January 7, 2019, from
http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/solid-waste/food-scraps-recycling/background-implementation/Pages/default.aspx Metro Vancouver. (2018b). Recycling Signage and Colours. Retrieved August 4, 2018, from
http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/solid-waste/recycling-signage-campaigns/recycling-signage- colours/Pages/default.aspx
Metro Vancouver. (2018d, February 28). License C004 - Harvest Fraser Rechmond Organics Ltd. Retrieved from http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/Permits-regulations-enforcement/solid-waste/current-
licence/CurrentLicences/C004%20-%20Harvest%20Fraser%20Richmond%20Organics%20Ltd.pdf
Metro Vancouver. (2018e, May 25). Metro Vancouver Licensed Solid Waste and Recyclable Material Facilities. Retrieved from http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/Permits-regulations-
enforcement/PermitRegulationEnforcementPublications/ActiveSolidWasteLicenceList.pdf
Metro Vancouver. (n.d.). Acceptance of Compostable Plastics in the Metro Vancouver Region: Metro Vancouver. Retrieved from https://mail-attachment.googleusercontent.com/attachment/u/0/?ui=2&ik=02691563e2&attid=0.1&permmsgid=msg- f:1622225939185337760&th=16834de5929105a0&view=att&disp=inline&saddbat=ANGjdJ8rk9HlEJmcj-
_iLMy1mPFjnDYkCfTYLKn_oHIbFIvUQQeQivu-r0Fhsn4Tidl0x-
V_pPqgdAUBrZGA7AgCmDwOPoZSUMX7SCY6LCZbGfiXk8pr6FD9H75qW-PB_8ynjNm7x0nkUX_X-
r4Q0ededoaf3qYnHGpY44Llq_cMteP-40Np_PcYuR4hkO-qtuYz3c83SiDmJ3OLF6mtnPYZ68wB2iLzoqyX9_WkNa2N6PIE- yWxB_7yltXhFQ_pN-
p7TUnIMxhkLGZqb_BTwkrdu5bFZA2V5QF4inFfOqYcZAuspVSXh_PqdLVLLWLLU7wSQBrfxfXyBx4PPrYCn5lThrKVWbCOEtEipjzMYx mvy20stPANYixVmNp165lu5HkIzYfJYcNS6pH_aSm-PCQf5NxsC0Nro5yelMLpo222lI9DNytW-DZ59TJx7oy9Wf5bVy5H2vuOI8- H7dpD8N2tMoXSFH7v2ctjgirr03fRc1WIk1QDFqUiU9_Txc-zZWmlkbwI-_9bqBP5wsbuBx7kysP9kVjbDTRGKE-
c6TYvhWb9Usl52GUyZPDcQ8Uou0YfazkO7XrHsrPyxCYLK0Vz4XC_OfVp- Ub6YfuPj4UJ7tcKpbsZ1x9e6OgBFnCd3B3vDmEJSn3Emwv5x_R-
Pawson, C. (2018, June 10). Environmentalists “encouraged” by G7 plastics charter but urge more action | CBC News. Retrieved January 7, 2019, from https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/plastics-charter-g7-reaction-1.4699860
Province of British Columbia. (2002, February 5). B.C. Reg. 18/2002: Organic Matter Recycling Regulation. Retrieved January 10, 2019, from http://www.bclaws.ca/Recon/document/ID/freeside/18_2002
Recycle More NC. (2011). How does a Material Recovery Facility (MRF) work? Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=7CFE5tD1CCI
Rojan, P. J., Anisha, G. S., Nair, N. R., & Nampoothiri, K. M. (2011). Poly Lactic Acid: An Environmentally Friendly Biodegradable Polymer.
In Z. E. Berkel & B. M. Johnson, Biodegradable Materials : Production, Properties, and Applications. New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.questu.ca:2048/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=e000xna&AN=382376&site=eds-live&scope=site
Rumpke Waste & Recycling. (2010). What is a Material Recovery Facility? Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=N1wpQIrM8cc
Shakoor, A., & Thomas, N. L. (2014). Talc as a nucleating agent and reinforcing filler in poly(lactic acid) composites. Polymer Engineering & Science, 54(1), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1002/pen.23543
Vancouver, C. of. (2018a, April 20). Zero Waste 2040 - RTS 12177. Retrieved from https://council.vancouver.ca/20180516/documents/pspc2a.pdf
Vancouver, C. of. (2018b, May 15). Zero Waste: Priorities and background [text/xml]. Retrieved January 7, 2019, from https://vancouver.ca/green-vancouver/zero-waste-priorities-and-background.aspx
Vancouver, C. of. (2018c, August 14). Single-Use Item Reduction Strategy [text/xml]. Retrieved January 6, 2019, from http://vancouver.ca/green-vancouver/single-use-items.aspx
Vendries, J., Hawkins, T. R., Hottle, T., Mosley, J., Allaway, D., Canepa, D., … Mistry, M. (2018, August). The Significance of Environmental Attributes as Indicators of the Life Cycle Environmental Impacts of Packaging and Food Service Ware. State of Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. Retrieved from https://www.oregon.gov/deq/FilterDocs/MaterialAttributes.pdf
Vieira, A. (2011). Degradation Parameters and Mechanical Properties Evolution. In Z. E. Berkel & B. M. Johnson, Biodegradable Materials : Production, Properties, and Applications. New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc. Retrieved from
http://ezproxy.questu.ca:2048/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=e000xna&AN=382376&site=eds- live&scope=site
Welle, F. (2011). Review: Twenty years of PET bottle to bottle recycling—An overview. Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 55, 865–
875. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2011.04.009
